Page 2 of 7

Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2006 4:11 am
by watersbrad
getoutoftheleftlane wrote:
watersbrad wrote:So, what's up with the 'lipstick'?
Are you referring to the 'red rocket'?
Indeed.

I might argue that it's a crucial component of the composition.






























Then again, I might argue that nobody will be able to provide a worthwhile explanation except for Mr. Horkey...

Meanwhile, WTF? :wink:

Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2006 10:41 am
by Rev.Mike
I'd say the beast is pretty stoked that in a few moments it will embark on committing some evil driven mayhem, it's excited.

Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2006 6:37 pm
by lettawren
people were asking - 20.5x40" 8 colors

Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2006 6:39 pm
by Codeblue
You guys weren't kidding about that red rocket.

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 12:45 am
by thegig
Anybody check out the close-ups on this puppy?! Letta...tell us your little secret...

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:29 pm
by lettawren
i have a secret? i really don't... if i had a sandwich i'd be really happy, but no sandwich and no secret.

Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 1:53 am
by Bralumian
Rev.Mike wrote:The building is becoming the beast, if you notice, the floorboards rippling are being drawn up into the cloak looking portion that's morphing into the beast. It's a were-house. I just wanna see this about 30-45 seconds later.
personally, i won't buy into it unless i hear it from horkey's mouth, as i don't generally like people other than the artist themselves casting their own opinion as a piece's definitive meaning or inspiration. plus, in this case of an image that is so willfully abstract, i perfer that people discover their own personal meaning - not based on someone else's theory.

Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 2:30 am
by Rev.Mike
Chu wanna fight mang?

Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 4:38 am
by ColdSoreSuperstar
Bralumian wrote:
Rev.Mike wrote:The building is becoming the beast, if you notice, the floorboards rippling are being drawn up into the cloak looking portion that's morphing into the beast. It's a were-house. I just wanna see this about 30-45 seconds later.
personally, i won't buy into it unless i hear it from horkey's mouth, as i don't generally like people other than the artist themselves casting their own opinion as a piece's definitive meaning or inspiration. plus, in this case of an image that is so willfully abstract, i perfer that people discover their own personal meaning - not based on someone else's theory.

Do you even know who he is?

It's REV. MIKE!

Doucheface.

(ps i heart the POS print!!! omg!)

Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 9:20 am
by Rev.Mike
I'm not that Mike. I'm just some other random dorky Mike that BRLSQ has enslaved.
My only talents are as sycophant, following rudimentary directions, espousing unfounded opinions on the internet to the consternation of others, and flowery sentences.

Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 11:41 am
by Bralumian
ColdSoreSuperstar wrote:
Bralumian wrote:
Rev.Mike wrote:The building is becoming the beast, if you notice, the floorboards rippling are being drawn up into the cloak looking portion that's morphing into the beast. It's a were-house. I just wanna see this about 30-45 seconds later.
personally, i won't buy into it unless i hear it from horkey's mouth, as i don't generally like people other than the artist themselves casting their own opinion as a piece's definitive meaning or inspiration. plus, in this case of an image that is so willfully abstract, i perfer that people discover their own personal meaning - not based on someone else's theory.

Do you even know who he is?

It's REV. MIKE!

Doucheface.

(ps i heart the POS print!!! omg!)
And that's supposed to impress me...why?

The POS print was done my Mike Davis not Rev. Mike...

apparently it is you who doesn't know who HE is...

Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 11:48 am
by jojobadass
yawn.....who cares.

It's a fantastic horkey, that's really all that matters

Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 11:53 am
by lettawren
is there gonna be a slap fight up in this piece?

i personally welcome pontification on our posters, because i think a lot of them can be interpreted in a billion ways, and the one you're most likely to never hear is aaron's own interpretation of it. therefore, everyone else should have at it. the only point i'd make is that rev. mike may have better perspective since he helped us print these beasts (at least i think he was there... it's all such a blur!), so he's likely had to stare at the image for far longer than he'd ever hoped!

Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 11:57 am
by Codeblue
I still like my initial interpretation.

Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 12:49 pm
by Rev.Mike
I guess this isn't the place to talk about art. I retract all my statements.